Saturday, May 15, 2010

Tim Bridgewater: In Utah's Vote, a Wake-up Call for Washington?

Does Bennett's ouster signal the the initial stage of the dismantling of the national congressional leviathon?

Amidst the great flurry of commentary which has emerged over the past week, regarding the ouster of three-term Senator Robert Bennett during last week's Utah GOP nominating convention, we stumbled upon this interesting Op-ed piece in yesterday's Washington Post, wherein Tim Bridgewater, top finisher for Bennett's Senate seat, heading into the June Utah primary, offers his own explanation of the political forces which will ultimately transform the political posture of Utah's federal legislative delegation. Here's the lede:

Last Saturday, delegates to the Utah Republican Party convention retired a three-term incumbent, Sen. Robert F. Bennett. With so many people jumping to conclusions, I'd like to explore what that vote -- in which I finished first, with 57 percent -- means.

So what about it gentle readers? Does Senator Bennett's ouster signal the beginning of national movement toward a new era of "a little humility" in Washington, as Senate candidate Bridgewater suggests? Are we witnessing the initial stage of the dismantling of the national congressional leviathan?

I give any of these "new revolutionary" congressmembers about a year in office before they are accepting "donations", dinners, etc from lobbyists and are just as bad, or worse, as those they are replacing.Even if that doesn't come to pass, if they want to get anything constructive done, they will have to cut deals and make compromises.

Don't kid yourself, Rudi, Whichever of the two is elected, either Bridgewater or Lee, will become so politically corrupted once they arrive at Capitol Hill, that the survivor will have to face the reality of lining up lobbyists bribes, and become indistinguishable from the Bob Bennetts of this world in a heartbeat, for their own political survival.

Corruption is endemic in the system. What we need is a real new American revolution.

Tim Bridgewater is absolutely right. Leadership in the executive and legislative branches of our federal government have fast-tracked our nation to the brink with a massive national debt, entitlement programs that we are paying into that have an expiration date, wars without end and a budget that congress can't seem to balance. The reality is we have to do better than the status quo.

Bridgewater needs to take a course in US Constitutional history. 1. He claims that the Constitution created a vertical balance of power. States were left with some powers, but the Constitution clearly makes the Federal Government the top dog. Article VI clearly says so. And don't forget about the necessary and proper clause at the end of Article I, sect. 8 - according to Madison, the most important clause in the Constiutition. 2. Many amendments to the Constitution have expanded the powers of the Federal government - most notably the 14th. And 3. While the Articles of Confederation limited delegates to Congress to serving no more than 6 years out of any 12, the Constitution does not provide for any such limit. Opponents of the Constitution back in 1787 (just like its opponents today) objected vehemently to a document that would allow for the creation of career politicians. The response of the authors of the Consitution? You think governing is easy? Experience is necessary. We need people to hold office for extended periods of time. If Bridgewater is going to continue to claim to be representing "Constitutional values" I think he needs to re-read the Constitution, as well as the notes of the convention taken by James Madison. There he can read our founders refer to states as "imaginary entities" that can of course possess no rights.